How Snowden was identified as Ars user TheTrueHOOHA

June 12, early afternoon
Reuters publishes a profile indicating that Snowden used to use the online username "The True HOOHA."

June 12, afternoon
Anthony DeRosa publishes an article noting that hundreds of posts were written on Ars Technica forums by a user named TheTrueHOOHA, with many biographical details that line up with Snowden.

June 12, Later afernoonBusiness Insider and Buzzfeed both publish articles confirming that TheTrueHOOHA is Snowden, noting that he published photos of himself on Ars and elsewhere.

Ed Snowden was 23 years old when he moved to Geneva in 2007. Soon after arriving, he was looking for a taste of home.

It wasn't that he was unhappy. Snowden's life was becoming the adventure he'd been looking for. Moving to Switzerland hadn't been his first choice—his dream picks were in Asia and Australia—but it certainly wasn't bad. Hired by the CIA and granted a diplomatic cover, he was a regular old IT guy whose life was elevated by a hint of international intrigue.

Snowden would soon move into a four-bedroom apartment covered by the agency. He'd blow off parking tickets, citing diplomatic immunity. He'd travel the continent. He befriended an Estonian rock star ("the funniest part is he's a SUPER NERD"), raced motorcycles in Italy, took in the Muslim call to prayer from his Sarajevo hotel room, and formed opinions about the food and the women in Bosnia, in Romania, in Spain.

But as his first spring dawned in Switzerland, it must have felt cold, foreign, and expensive. Two days after his arrival in Switzerland, Snowden logged onto #arsificial, a channel on Ars Technica's public Internet Relay Chat (IRC) server. He'd been frequenting this space for a few months, chatting with whomever happened to be hanging out.

< TheTrueHOOHA>

You guys can't say I look gay anymore.

< User1>

you look gay

< TheTrueHOOHA>

not anymore. I'm living in switzerland. i'm the straightest looking man inthe country

< User2>

rolpix

< TheTrueHOOHA>

as soon as my camera makes it here. :P

< TheTrueHOOHA>

you guys wouldn't believe how expensive shit is here, either

< TheTrueHOOHA>

you can't get tap water in restaraunts

< User2>

some examples, please

< TheTrueHOOHA>

they make you buy it in bottles

< TheTrueHOOHA>

glass bottles. 5 bucks a pop

< User2>

you buy the tap water?

< TheTrueHOOHA>

hamburgers are $15

The $15 hamburgers weren't even as good as McDonald's; they tasted "like greasy cardboard." Everything was written in French and measured in meters ("God I hate metric," wrote Snowden. "Why can't they use real numbers over here?"). The food packages had "kilojoules" listed on them. ("I'm not a battery!") Europeans couldn't even play movies right. ("They put an intermission in 300.")

Snowden logged on to the public IRC chat room with the same username he used across the Web: TheTrueHOOHA. The chat room was a place he would return to on dozens of occasions over his years in Switzerland, and his writings fill in details about the man who may go down as the most famous leaker in US history. Over the years that he hung out in #arsificial, Snowden went from being a fairly insulated American to being a man of the world. He would wax philosophical about money, politics, and in one notable exchange, about his uncompromising views about government leakers.

Four years later, Snowden took a job with a government contractor for the specific purpose of gathering secret information on domestic spying being done by the National Security Agency (NSA). In May, he hopped a plane to Hong Kong before the NSA knew where he was going. Once there, Snowden began a process of leaking top-secret documents to journalists. Snowden's first leak confirmed what activists had suspected but couldn't prove: there was a dragnet government surveillance program collecting information on every American's phone calls.

The chat logs are the most detailed view available into the formation of a man who has been hailed as a hero, and condemned as a traitor by leaders in his own country. In his public statements, Snowden is smooth and uncompromising, radiating intelligence. Snowden has insisted the focus remain on the leaked documents, not him. But he has also kept himself in the spotlight, speaking to three newspapers, doing live Q&As, and dribbling out more documents over time. Intentional or not, Snowden has maximized media attention. He is a Deep Throat for the social media age. Revealing American secrets is not enough; he has applied to be their chief interpreter as well.

An acerbic user, at home on #arsificial

IRC isn't Twitter. Much of the talk in chat channels isn't much more elevated than barroom banter, and Snowden's conversations as TheTrueHOOHA are no exception. But his personality and his beliefs do shine through. IRC chats can hold meaningful revelations about public figures, and Ars has used them as a reportingsource before. Snowden was the kind of bar buddy willing to get into a political argument and never give up, even if he pissed off the whole room.

If IRC is a bar, then the #arsificial channel is the back room occupied by drinkers who feel the front is just too stuffy for them. Officially unofficial, #arsificial was created by users who chafed at the moderation in other Ars chatrooms. "This channel is unsupported and has no rules as such," reads an automated message sent to users upon entry. Unlike on other Ars channels, for instance, chatter veering into racism or sexism wouldn't get a user silenced. "Under no circumstances should anyone complain to #mods about conduct in this channel," read the entry message. "Anyone taking any complaint about #arsificial to #mods will receive a ban from #arsificial."
It was an online destination Snowden would return to dozens of times over the next four years, often remaining quiet for hours on end before engaging in bursts of dialogue. The chat snippets show a strident personality, and at times, the inchoate ideology of a man who would ultimately take drastic measures to fight government secrecy. In #arsificial, Snowden was frequently someone ready to go to the mat for his beliefs—even when no one was on his side.

And he could be abrasive. Snowden didn't short stocks just to make money—he did it because it was the right thing to do. He saw himself as a paladin of the markets, bringing "liquidity" to all. As for those who didn't agree with him about the rightness of the gold standard or the need to eliminate Social Security, they weren't just mistaken—they were "retards."

Four years ago, Snowden presented an image of always being sure of himself, sometimes to the point of seeming arrogant. He often thought he was the smartest guy in the room, and he let others know it.

The Ars IRC server doesn't log conversations, and there are no official transcripts of any discussions on that server. However, after learning that Snowden appeared to be an Ars user, we received chat logs from multiple longtime users who recalled IRC conversations with the user known as TheTrueHOOHA. That IRC user claimed he was the registered Ars user TheTrueHOOHA, who posted nearly 800 posts in Ars forums, including biographical information and photos that match Snowden.

Any handle can be adopted in IRC. However, such "identity theft," while theoretically possible, is unheard of. These IRC remarks—like the Ars forum posts—correlate precisely to publicly known facts about Snowden's life.

Life in Switzerland

By April, a few months into his Swiss adventure, the chats show that Snowden was warming to the country. "Yeah… It's pretty cool so far," he wrote. "The girls are gorgeous, too. Oh, and prostitution is legal."

He detailed cultural observations about Switzerland, and his travels elsewhere, to anyone who happened to be in the chat room. "Jesus christ are the swiss rich," he wrote. "The fucking mcdonald's workers make more than I do. They make like 50,000 franc a year."

< TheTrueHOOHA>

the roads are 35 inches wide

< TheTrueHOOHA>

with 9000 cars on them, two tram tracks, and a bus lane

< TheTrueHOOHA>

and a bike lane

< TheTrueHOOHA>

i imagine mirrors get clipped off all the time

< TheTrueHOOHA>

I'm afraid I'd bump into someone and have to pay for it.

< User3>

do they have a large immigrant population doing the lower-class work?

< TheTrueHOOHA>

Yeah.lots of unidentifiable southeast asian people and eastern europeans who don't speak french or english

< TheTrueHOOHA>

but don't get me wrong -- this place is amazing

< TheTrueHOOHA>

it's like living in a postcard

< User4>

TheTrueHOOHA: where are you? .ch?

< TheTrueHOOHA>

it's just nightmarishly expensive and horrifically classist

< TheTrueHOOHA>

Yeah. Geneva, Switzerland

< User4>

wicked!

< TheTrueHOOHA>

Yeah... it's pretty cool so far

It was cool, but Snowden was often critical of the Swiss. An average visitor to Switzerland talks about how great the chocolate is; Snowden saw a country of overpaid racists.

He admired those who managed to survive on the margins of society. In Switzerland, it was the hardscrabble intelligence of the Nigerian refugees that impressed him. "It's that whole necessity thing," he asserted. "Motherfuckers have been there like eight months and speak all three languages. Not counting romansch, which doesn't count. Ever."

And he kept coming back to #arsificial to share his adventures and observations.

< TheTrueHOOHA>

everybody hates gypsies apparently

< User5>

what's there not to hate about gypsies

< TheTrueHOOHA>

poor gypsies

< User6>

Gypsies are the niggers of Europe. If not worse.

< User6>

I honestly don't have anything against them... But everyone has such a kneejerk hateful reaction to them

< TheTrueHOOHA>

yeah, i see that ALL the time in switz.

< TheTrueHOOHA>

like, some crime happens ANYWHERE

< TheTrueHOOHA>

immediately "those goddamned gypsies!"

< User6>

[User5]: like I said, I didn't have much experience with them, besides seeing them dirty, begging on the streets.

< TheTrueHOOHA>

"it wasn't a gypsy"

< TheTrueHOOHA>

"oh, it must be those fucking muslims!" "no? then those goddamned africans!"

< TheTrueHOOHA>

i have never, EVER seen a people more racist than the swiss
jesus god they look down on EVERYONE. even each other.

< TheTrueHOOHA>

you know who i liked?

< TheTrueHOOHA>

the italians. man. friendly people. fucking crazy, but good people.

< User7>

we don't have ghettos in the UK

< TheTrueHOOHA>

sure you do

< TheTrueHOOHA>

i went to london just last yearit's where all of your muslims live
I didn't want to get out of the car.

< User7>

no, that's Bradford

< TheTrueHOOHA>

I thought I had gotten off of plane in the wrong country
I don't know where it was, but it was by London City Airport and it was terrifying

< User8>

same thing in France

< User7>

TheTrueHOOHA: east London
yeah, a lot of ethnic groups have settled there

558 Reader Comments

It has all to do with your post, none of those articles (neither positive opinions on Snowden or negative opinions on him) are worth a damn. The fact that Ars has decided to make this a personality contest (looking into the man) just makes me glad I've never subscribed.

Some articles with substance about the disclosures, instead of about the man, would be appreciated. But looking at the natsec tag, it's clear the majority of them are about his personality and even disgustingly enough reporting on how "alone" his girlfriend felt.

And with that, I'm done with this publication.

That would make sense, if the post I was replying to what about that, which it wasn't.

I'm sorry that you don't want to read about anything more than the one piece of a story that you, personally, care about, but the entire thing is relevant. Where he came from, what his opinions were, how (if) they changed, where they stand now, where they might be in the future. This information is important.

That doesn't mean that the NSA actions aren't also, or even more, important. For some reason you think it is a line in the sand, it is not.

All that said, even with your comment, that article has absolutely nothing to do with what I said or the comment I was replying to.

Shame because the Snowden supporters are realizing he's an egocentric douche?

Yup... and he's currently a guest of the KGB.

A guest of the KGB? You mean stuck in the international terminal, with wikileaks legal advisors and other representatives.What proof do you have at all that anyone besides Ecuadorian officials have had contact with him?Oh right, you don't. That's not even what the ongoing smear campaign is saying, and yet you make claims like this.

The Ecuadorian officials never were able to contact him in Moscow. They never even saw him. Nobody ever saw him after he left the plane. At least nobody who talked about it then. The only one with him seems to be Sarah Harrison (of Wikileaks) and she also seems to have vanished without a trace, nobody saw her or spoke to her either.

Although I disagree with almost everything he said in those IRC logs, I have to give him props for being able to change his mind and do what he did. Not everyone is capable of changing their mind, especially when they have a vested interest in not doing so.

Did he change his mind, or did he see an opportunity to become famous and worshiped within a certain group and took it? Even if he did change his mind, it makes you wonder where his core values will be in another 4 years, if he can so radically flip on something he seemed to care deeply about.

I submit that looking into the abyss can change someone's total outlook.

Possibly, but that is just speculation. It is just as easy to speculate that he saw a way to get famous and took it.I would be interested to know if his opinions slowly changed over time, or if he saw a chance and jumped on it. I am also very curious to know if he will feel that he did the same thing 4, or even 10 years down the line, as perspective often changes a persons opinion. Many people who do things that they think are right often grow to regret the way they carried out those actions later in life.

Put me in the category of the many who are disappointed by this recent pop journalism tangent that seems rather uncharacteristic for Ars and amounts to a creepy form of water-carrying for the dark side.

edit: And yes, continue to lash out against any dissent by voting this down into oblivion just like all the other comments from long-time members here who think this is becoming absurd. That really shows how open-minded you are.

- By publishing comments and chat logs from a former user, you are once again violating the trust and assumption of privacy that Ars users might have in posting contributions under a pseudonym, with no intention of seeing their words ending up on the front page.

Its a public chat room. PUBLIC being the key word there.

You're missing my point. The public/private distinction on the Internet is far more blurry than it once was. Even though users are in fact posting on a publicly accessible medium, they might have an assumption or expectation of privacy when they are posting under a pseudonim, on a forum or chatroom, hidden in the de facto anonymity provided by the multitide of other contributions.

Of course, this assumption of privacy is often misplaced, as Ars has reminded us again with this article.But I believe the right thing to do here for Ars would have been to respect the trust of its users, however naïve and misplaced it was.

Ars didn't log it, other participants in the chat did. It's been years since I've been on IRC at all but every IRC client used to have a feature to log everything that comes through it, not just chat in channel but private messages. So he should have known it could, and likely was being logged.

And when these logs surfaced, (I will say I can't imagine keeping logs that long though), who better to write them up but Ars, the site they were from? You don't think some other site wouldn't have run with them if they hadn't?

And I don't understand why you think we should trust Ars to respect the privacy of our very public comments?

Which proves that you *are* actually missing the point I was trying to make, i.e. that on the Internet the scope of the "public" and "private" spheres are often tricky to delineate, and that the expectations of privacy by users are often disconnected from the public/private accessibility of the medium.

It is unfortunate that Ars is still focusing on Snowden rather than the NSA's surveillance programs he revealed.

It's also unfortunate that the people of Ars, who should be thinking the same thing, have down voted your comment 30+ times. No, let's not concentrate on the whole our government spying on its own people, let's ignore that so we can play the next round of where or who is Ed Snowden.

Shame because the Snowden supporters are realizing he's an egocentric douche?

Yup... and he's currently a guest of the KGB.

Its called the FSB and SVR now. SVR is the Foreign Intelligence Service - FSB is the Federal Security Service of Russia. The FSB is the primary domestic security agency of Russia and the primary successor agency of the Soviet Committee of State Security (the KGB). The SVR is Russia's primary external intelligence agency and successor of the First Chief Directorate (PGU) of the KGB.

It is unfortunate that Ars is still focusing on Snowden rather than the NSA's surveillance programs he revealed.

I fear this is inevitable until the world has access to the unencrypted versions of his document cache. We've all suspected that we're being spied on for a long time. We need more details to focus the discussion. Right now it is easier to find details about Snowden than it is to find details about PRISM.

This sort of narrative is for Entertainment Tonight, not the New York Times. Which of these organizations does Ars want to be?

New York Times narrative:

Quote:

Mr. Snowden’s fascination with computer technology began in high school in Anne Arundel County, Md., near Baltimore, and became a focus of his life after he dropped out in his sophomore year. He socialized with a tight circle of people who were enthralled by the Internet and Japanese anime culture.

Quote:

Mr. Snowden and his friends built personal computers from parts ordered over the Internet. They created a Web site called Ryuhana Press, which the former friend was amused to see reported in recent days as a real business. “It was the name of our club,” he said.

His friends persuaded “Edowaado,” as Mr. Snowden called himself, using the Japanese version of “Edward,” to get his high school equivalency diploma. “I don’t think he even studied. He just showed up and passed the G.E.D.,” the friend said.

I'd bet they update it with info on his time in Sweden now that Ars has covered it.

[Completely and entirely off topic, so feel free to downvote me harshly.] I'm an old fart on SS whose wages were severely garnished all my life for contributions, and I saw with interest Snowden's rant against SS. I wonder whether that's the prevailing view.

Shame because the Snowden supporters are realizing he's an egocentric douche?

As Snowden has said: this story is not about Snowden. It doesn't matter if he's Mephistopheles in human form, or a pedophilic mass-murderer, or if he leaked because the other kids were nasty to him in the playground. The information he released will remain ten thousand times more important. That information is valid, and it's vital to the public. When we get done fixing democracy, then we can debate Snowden's personality.

I'm particularly disappointed that Ars Technica would be so eager to join the journalistic sideshow. Did you expect us to be impressed? Why didn't you just print some pix of Snowden's girlfriend, like everyone else?

Shame because the Snowden supporters are realizing he's an egocentric douche?

As Snowden has said: this story is not about Snowden. It doesn't matter if he's Mephistopheles in human form, or a pedophilic mass-murderer, or if he leaked because the other kids were nasty to him in the playground. The information he released will remain ten thousand times more important. That information is valid, and it's vital to the public. When we get done fixing democracy, then we can debate Snowden's personality.

I'm particularly disappointed that Ars Technica would be so eager to join the journalistic sideshow. Did you expect us to be impressed? Why didn't you just print some pix of Snowden's girlfriend, like everyone else?

Just because Snowden said doesn't make it so. He is a part of the story. Not the entire story, but a part of it. The thoughts and opinions of a person who would do this, and did do this, are not only interesting by relevant. This isn't about his personality, it is about the beliefs and actions of a person being in stark contrast. It brings into question many things, including his character. All of this is separate from what the NSA is doing, but that doesn't mean it isn't relevant to the story as a whole.

It has all to do with your post, none of those articles (neither positive opinions on Snowden or negative opinions on him) are worth a damn. The fact that Ars has decided to make this a personality contest (looking into the man) just makes me glad I've never subscribed.

Some articles with substance about the disclosures, instead of about the man, would be appreciated. But looking at the natsec tag, it's clear the majority of them are about his personality and even disgustingly enough reporting on how "alone" his girlfriend felt.

And with that, I'm done with this publication.

That would make sense, if the post I was replying to what about that, which it wasn't.

I'm sorry that you don't want to read about anything more than the one piece of a story that you, personally, care about, but the entire thing is relevant. Where he came from, what his opinions were, how (if) they changed, where they stand now, where they might be in the future. This information is important.

That doesn't mean that the NSA actions aren't also, or even more, important. For some reason you think it is a line in the sand, it is not.

All that said, even with your comment, that article has absolutely nothing to do with what I said or the comment I was replying to.

It has everything to do with the commentCyrus is reporting on events that are happening, following the story.Mullin is just reporting drivel like "here are his opinions on the hamburgers in foreign countries", other dickish comments, "he had an opinion on leakers, seems to have changed, what do you make of it?And best of all "here's his girlfriend's blog post on how alone she felt"I appreciate Cyrus' articles much more, though I'd really appreciate some insight into some of the things I made earlier in the thread in addition to what Fournier brings up.

It has all to do with your post, none of those articles (neither positive opinions on Snowden or negative opinions on him) are worth a damn. The fact that Ars has decided to make this a personality contest (looking into the man) just makes me glad I've never subscribed.

Some articles with substance about the disclosures, instead of about the man, would be appreciated. But looking at the natsec tag, it's clear the majority of them are about his personality and even disgustingly enough reporting on how "alone" his girlfriend felt.

And with that, I'm done with this publication.

That would make sense, if the post I was replying to what about that, which it wasn't.

I'm sorry that you don't want to read about anything more than the one piece of a story that you, personally, care about, but the entire thing is relevant. Where he came from, what his opinions were, how (if) they changed, where they stand now, where they might be in the future. This information is important.

That doesn't mean that the NSA actions aren't also, or even more, important. For some reason you think it is a line in the sand, it is not.

All that said, even with your comment, that article has absolutely nothing to do with what I said or the comment I was replying to.

It has everything to do with the commentCyrus is reporting on events that are happening, following the story.Mullin is just reporting drivel like "here are his opinions on the hamburgers in foreign countries", other dickish comments, "he had an opinion on leakers, seems to have changed, what do you make of it?And best of all "here's his girlfriend's blog post on how alone she felt"I appreciate Cyrus' articles much more, though I'd really appreciate some insight into some of the things I made earlier in the thread in addition to what Fournier brings up.

No, it doesn't. He didn't like an article because it differed from his viewpoint so now he is never going to read one that might differ from his viewpoint again. End of story. Your opinions of if the story is important or if you care, which really was your point, are irrelevant.

I think the biggest shame here -- outside of digging into IRC logs to show the guy was a douchebag (quoth Rumsfeld: "known known") -- is that Ars protects the identities of the other vile racists, homophobes, and philistines involved in these puerile "conversations."

Did someone outside of Ars send you these transcripts from their own personal logging, or has Ars outlined a policy of recording everything said in #arsificial, along with full rights to repost transcripts at any time?

Just goes to show how permanent everything on the internet is, when people are keeping four-year old logs of IRC chats.

Someone probably sent their own logs to Ars, as I was given the impression in the article that Ars doesn't have these logs saved by themselves.I know I have some IRC logs from like 15 years ago, sitting around, moving from one disk to the next as I changed computers.

I think the biggest shame here -- outside of digging into IRC logs to show the guy was a douchebag (quoth Rumsfeld: "known known") -- is that Ars protects the identities of the other vile racists, homophobes, and philistines involved in these puerile "conversations."

While I doubt this will change your opinion, had you read the article and the comments you would have known that Ars didn't dig into IRC logs, these were sent to them by users.The opinions of other users, no matter how vile, are not relevant, as they didn't leak NSA information. This is about learning about the person who leaked the information and their viewpoints on people who leak, not about what others may or may not have said.

It has all to do with your post, none of those articles (neither positive opinions on Snowden or negative opinions on him) are worth a damn. The fact that Ars has decided to make this a personality contest (looking into the man) just makes me glad I've never subscribed.

Some articles with substance about the disclosures, instead of about the man, would be appreciated. But looking at the natsec tag, it's clear the majority of them are about his personality and even disgustingly enough reporting on how "alone" his girlfriend felt.

And with that, I'm done with this publication.

That would make sense, if the post I was replying to what about that, which it wasn't.

I'm sorry that you don't want to read about anything more than the one piece of a story that you, personally, care about, but the entire thing is relevant. Where he came from, what his opinions were, how (if) they changed, where they stand now, where they might be in the future. This information is important.

That doesn't mean that the NSA actions aren't also, or even more, important. For some reason you think it is a line in the sand, it is not.

All that said, even with your comment, that article has absolutely nothing to do with what I said or the comment I was replying to.

It has everything to do with the commentCyrus is reporting on events that are happening, following the story.Mullin is just reporting drivel like "here are his opinions on the hamburgers in foreign countries", other dickish comments, "he had an opinion on leakers, seems to have changed, what do you make of it?And best of all "here's his girlfriend's blog post on how alone she felt"I appreciate Cyrus' articles much more, though I'd really appreciate some insight into some of the things I made earlier in the thread in addition to what Fournier brings up.

No, it doesn't. He didn't like an article because it differed from his viewpoint so now he is never going to read one that might differ from his viewpoint again. End of story. Your opinions of if the story is important or if you care, which really was your point, are irrelevant.

Again, he pointed out Joe versus Cyrus. Fact is, Mullin posts shit about his girlfriend and Farivar reports on the recent happenings.That's the difference, not their 'opinion on Snowden.' I don't really know or care about Mullin's opinions on Snowden: these articles are just drivel.

No, it doesn't. He didn't like an article because it differed from his viewpoint so now he is never going to read one that might differ from his viewpoint again. End of story. Your opinions of if the story is important or if you care, which really was your point, are irrelevant.

Again, he pointed out Joe versus Cyrus. Fact is, Mullin posts shit about his girlfriend and Farivar reports on the recent happenings.That's the difference, not their 'opinion on Snowden.' I don't really know or care about Mullin's opinions on Snowden: these articles are just drivel.

Again, he pointed out an author whose viewpoint he agreed with vs one who he didn't. That is the difference, because it was about this article, not an article written a week ago. I don't really care about your opinions, because you are falling into the same trap, any viewpoint different than your own should be ignored.

It is unfortunate that Ars is still focusing on Snowden rather than the NSA's surveillance programs he revealed.

I fear this is inevitable until the world has access to the unencrypted versions of his document cache. We've all suspected that we're being spied on for a long time. We need more details to focus the discussion. Right now it is easier to find details about Snowden than it is to find details about PRISM.

Here's a detail about PRISM: They're recording/logging EVERYTHING, with the help of all the major Internet service(s) providers. That's all you/we need to know. The question is what are we gonna do about it, now that there's no more doubt that it's true, "you are being watched" (quote from "Person of Interest").

I don't see why this is shameful or bad reporting. Its really interesting to me and I think it gives more substance to who Snowden is. Logs are out there for all of us randomly connecting to IRC servers.

I particularly like Snowden and the leaks. I think its more interesting that a crazy libertarian who liked the gold standard found objectionable content and backed off his polemic against leaking in favor of doing what he felt was right.

From a "fuck the mods" perspective it is pretty funny seeing Ars dump dox on unofficial channels though.

No, it doesn't. He didn't like an article because it differed from his viewpoint so now he is never going to read one that might differ from his viewpoint again. End of story. Your opinions of if the story is important or if you care, which really was your point, are irrelevant.

Again, he pointed out Joe versus Cyrus. Fact is, Mullin posts shit about his girlfriend and Farivar reports on the recent happenings.That's the difference, not their 'opinion on Snowden.' I don't really know or care about Mullin's opinions on Snowden: these articles are just drivel.

Again, he pointed out an author whose viewpoint he agreed with vs one who he didn't. That is the difference, because it was about this article, not an article written a week ago. I don't really care about your opinions, because you are falling into the same trap, any viewpoint different than your own should be ignored.

This article doesn't have a viewpoint, and certainly don't state Mullin's opinions on Snowden. Neither did the girlfriend article. Neither have any of Cyrus' articles. I'm talking about the distraction with human interest pieces away from the disclosures. That's the issue. Cyrus is guilty as well, at least he's reporting on the events. The contraste between the two though, if you can't see it, there's no helping.

"I don't particularly enjoy having to look at who has authored an article before having to read it, but I feel obligated to have to start. The contrast and differences between Cyrus' articles about Snowden and the ones you write are significant and palpable. "He's not talking about their viewpoints, but nice making shit up.

Excellent article, Mullin...Everyone, including Snowden, knows that what you write publicly on the Internet stays that way. The public has a right to know everything about a person who is claiming to be giving them the straight shot on issues like these: who the man is tells us a lot about what he's saying.

More and more, this looks like a tale of a young man who knows a little bit about a lot (don't we all?) but has misconstrued that knowledge into thinking he knows a great deal about everything and that kings and presidents need to harken to him. I find that a little sad, really.

I vacationed in Switzerland for three weeks when I was 18--spent ten days in Montreux and ten days in Zurich--Montreux was gorgeous--snow, everywhere, and so quiet it was deafening. Zurich, eh--like any other city, I suppose. I also loved the overall cleanliness of the country, too--something the Swiss no doubt take a great deal of pride in (and deservedly so.) It was a vacation I'll always remember. Strange, really, to think of Snowden there--almost like a square peg in a round hole. Very interesting to note in his background, however.